Have you ever noticed how politicians always pipe up with new initiatives around election time? It is like they need to show that they've been busy during their term or something...

Everything I do is just some political ploy apparently lol

I'd say the timing of this announcement was very "convenient"...

Its not like the election is tomorrow mate haha. It's okay though, I am just a political tactician. Even when I am not doing something people think I am plotting. It's like you people don't know me at all lol.

_______: ______________________________________________________: _______________________________________________(add more for however many you have)

Framework (Optional): Here you describe a framework for how you think the judge should evaluate the debate. An example might be: As the resolution says this, my burden of proof is to show either x or y. If I can prove either, I win the debate. This is something you"ll likely need to defend.

Contention 1: TaglineClaim (the main point of the contention): __________. Data (supporting evidence and reasoning): __________. Impacts (why the judge should care about the contention): ___________. Warrant (tie the contention and reasoning back to the resolution and conclude): __________.

Contention 2: TaglineClaim (the main point of the contention): __________. Data (supporting evidence and reasoning): __________. Impacts (why the judge should care about the contention): ___________. Warrant (tie the contention and reasoning back to the resolution and conclude): __________.

Contention 3: TaglineClaim (the main point of the contention): __________. Data (supporting evidence and reasoning): __________. Impacts (why the judge should care about the contention): ___________. Warrant (tie the contention and reasoning back to the resolution and conclude): __________.

Conclusion: Sum up the round with the taglines and your most important evidence that you want the judges to remember.

How to do sources: You must include a sources space at the bottom of the round (1). Any evidence that deals with numbers, data, or facts that are not common knowledge needs to be sourced (2). As you"ll notice, you"ll give a number indicator after the statements that need a source so as to help the readers find your sources (3).

Sources:1. Source one2. Source two3. Source three

Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder

Outline:Outlining what I have to do to win, and what my arguments will be. This will make the debate easier to read. In Premise I, I will show this, and in Premise II: I will show that. Then I'll prove so and so in Argument I, and so on... You don't need this every round. It's only optional for if you feel like the debate will get complicated, as it give your argument an edge with the voters.

Premise I:Definitions for this premise are listed here. You just put down the definitions.

Now I show a factual concept that I will later use to base my case on. These are so you can store large amounts of facts. Only facts big enough that they would distract from the argument if put in there. Keeping the argument straight on track is key for easy reading.

Sources

Premise II:Definitions here as well.. All definitions should be in the Premise sections.

More factual concepts to back up your arguments. Now not EVERYTHING can be backed up in the Premise. Only major concepts. Small concepts and facts will still be in your Arguments. That is why you will have sources down there too.

Sources.

Argument I:No definitions. If you need to define something, it should be in your Premise. If you need to define something that doesn't fit in one of your Premises, you probably need another Premise. Arguments And Premises are quoted back to as A1, and P1, respectively. Or A2, and P2. If the quote in another round, just do this: R2-A1.

Sources.

Argument II:Your next argument. Of course, for Rebuttals, you just name it Rebuttal instead of Argument. If you need to quote back to it, just say R3 A2. Keep Rebuttal I fixed on what Argument I was about. Don't mix up the system. Your arguments should be very much backed up with your Premises. You have sources each section for easy access. In a good debate, your Premises and Arguments will be big enough to look nice with sources every section.

Sources.

Conclusion: List of the other guys dropped cases and bad spelling here, and conclude that you are right.====================================================================================================================

A template for a debate? I don't think one should dictate how to argue, even for new people. We should instead inform them of how they are to state what they want to state, such as T.E.E.L and S.H.E.E.P instead of [insert argument 1 here] [insert evidence here] we would ideally want debates to be personalised and fluid. Sure noobs start with poor quality debates, I can tell you that, but what I can also tell you is that improvement came through refinement of my style which I have noted to be different to the next man, who is different yet again. What I am left with is a personalised debating language that works well for me. This just seems like giving helmets to children on playgrounds. I can see no reason why it would be helpful as opposed to qualitative information on how to say what they want to say.